31–40 of 946 posts
You fire the CEO and completely destroy a 90b company because of these two reasons?
No wonder everyone wants out. I would think I was going crazy if I sat in a meeting and heard these two reason.
Also wondering why the mods don't consolidate them
Title says: OpenAI's employees were given two explanations for why Sam Altman was fired. They're unconvinced and furious. Some breaking news: An employer does not owe you an explanation. You exchange money for labor. If anyone thinks for a second that they are essential or that anyone would prioritize them over the company I think they are delusional. OpenAI is a brand (at least in tech) with large recognition and th…
Seems very feudal, serfdom mindset to accept that your employer doesn't owe you an explanation. An employment is a contract which both parties enter into willingly. Termination of contract deserves some level of empathetic glad handling, however minimal. It's just game theory - if you plan to hire again, you have to be gracious while firing someone because word gets around.
There’s only 4 board members, right?
Who wanted him fired. Is this a situation where they all thought the others wanted him fired and were just stupid?
Have they been feeding motions into chatgpt and asking “should add I do this?”
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You are a hero! I couldn’t access the article. Weirdly both of these do not seem to be fireable offences. Maybe the second if it was related to a personnel issue that maybe he had a conflict of interest with?
I posted it since that was hidden very deep in the article, it is annoying to find information among all that padding. > Weirdly both of these do not seem to be fireable offences Yeah I agree that doesn't seem egregious enough to warrant firing him on the spot. I can see why most of the company takes Altmans side here.
It sounds like someone perhaps jumped to a very negative conclusion about Sam's intentions, and it would be interesting to find out which member of the board came to that conclusion. There's got to be someone in the driving seat of this train wreck, and I'm sure it will come out.
I'd like some corroboration for that statement because Sustkever has said very inconsistent things during this whole merry debacle.
> One explanation was that Altman was said to have given two people at OpenAI the same project. Have these people never worked at any other company before? Probably every company with more than 10 employees does something like this.
"After six months, they realised our entire floor was duplicating the work of the one upstairs".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As an employee I want to know that the board/execs/c suite are doing a good job and their decisions align with the companies stated goals. If they are not then it is time to start looking for a new job so that I don't end up in a bad situation financially.
It depends. If you are seeing your job more than just a means to an ends maybe. If you see it as transactional and you need the company to stay in business while you work there why would you bother looking for a new job?
I would guess that most of the people working at openai could get a job anywhere.